"Voter ID" gets everyone all huffy-puffy. Everyone should realize that NC Law already requires you to present a "current and valid photo identification" at the poll: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegisla…
The biggest problem that I see with the new bill is the introduction of the Voter ID Card, for those people that do not otherwise have a "valid" ID. At a time when we should be tightening our belts, the State is proposing to spend upwards of $20mil to give a slim percentage of our population ID Cards:
In all fairness, DanTK did suggest that some Asian families come from India...
Thanks for the reply, Chuck.
Firstly: I cannot argue that TJ would support our current system just as you cannot argue that he would not. The tax system of his time was appropriate and its relative simplicity compared to that of now only reflects how much more complicated economics has become.
Secondly, you make the presumption that TJ "would [not] approve" of our current education system based on his idea of taxes. I did not say that only that he enacted laws in VA that made for public funding to the poor. The "belief" that he would NOT support our current tax system is quite different than the "fact" that he would support subsidizing public education for the poor.
What I did say was that if we use the TJ quote, out of context as you suggest, it would mean that everyone that pays taxes (regardless of the system, because we've already discounted TJs assumed idea of our current system) should get equal access.
1. you lost me with "socialist". Please refrain from making yourself look stupid by using this word. We are so far from socialism the Socialists around the world laugh at us.
2. I am glad you acknowledge that "neighborhood" schools may not be the solution. I am willing to concede that the current "diversity" system is not the "best" solution. But my one caveat is this: I don't think there is a "best" solution - that's the nature of compromise.
3. Your idea of using income tax to fund schools in ludicrous: currently, businesses contribute to the fund, not just individuals. By using income tax instead of property tax, we would encounter greater fluctuation in budgets - losing your job means no income ergo no tax, but you will still owe property tax regardless of whether you are working or not. I don't believe for a second that you are taking a tax burden away from me by letting corporations not pay part of the education fund through property tax.
I think the school board is going to find that doing what they propose is going to be a lot harder than everyone thinks. We'll see. I'm glad I don't have to worry about my kids.
Good luck, and good night.
Hey Chuck: Thanks for the TJ Quote. As a UVA Alum, I love hearding from Tommy J...
But you are using that particular quote out of context. You can read the full memo here: http://tinyurl.com/y89be99
In brief: Jefferson was remarking that specific rich individuals should not be targeted by the state for extra taxation, but that taxes should be applied to all individuals consistent with the tax laws on the books. He then went on to add that inheritance law was the best way to prevent the overgrown wealth of an individual from becoming a threat to the state.
And to use TJ words to oppose Free Public Education is asinine. This is the man that passed several landmark education bills in Virginia ensuring that the State supplied a free education to the poor funded at the common expense. He also started the second oldest publicly funded, State run University in the Nation.
But let's say we take your quote out of context: why should I, a tax-payer who pays the same tax as everyone else, get any better or worse treatment in the public tax funded education system? In other words, as a law abiding tax-payer, why should I get more of an education from the free state system than a poorer tax-payer?
Indy Week • 302 E. Pettigrew St., Suite 300, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation